Department of Psychology.
J Occup Health Psychol. 2016 Jul;21(3):352-365. doi: 10.1037/ocp0000017. Epub 2015 Nov 16.
The authors present a short, valid, gender invariant measure of workplace incivility that should have a high degree of utility in a variety of research designs, especially those concerned with reducing participant burden such as experience sampling and multiwave longitudinal designs. Given ongoing concerns about the psychometric properties of workplace mistreatment constructs, they validated a 4-item measure of experienced incivility based on series of 3 independent field studies (N = 2,636). In addition to retaining items on the basis of employee rated conceptual alignment (i.e., judgmental criteria) with a standard incivility definition (i.e., ambiguous intent to harm), items were also chosen based on external criteria in terms of their ability to explain incremental variance in outcomes of interest (e.g., role overload, interpersonal deviance). Items with large systematic relationships with other mistreatment constructs (i.e., abusive supervision, supervisor undermining) were excluded. In turn, the authors demonstrated that the 4-item measure is gender invariant, a critical issue that has received limited attention in the literature to date. They also experimentally investigated the effect of recall window (2 weeks, 1 month, 1 year) and found a differential pattern of effect sizes for various outcomes of interest. A fourth independent field study was conducted as a practical application of the measure within a longitudinal framework. An autoregressive model examining experienced incivility and counterproductive work behaviors was tested. Data was collected from a sample of 278 respondents at 3 time points with 1 month between assessments. Implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record
作者提出了一种简短、有效且性别不变的工作场所不文明行为衡量标准,该标准在各种研究设计中应该具有高度的实用性,特别是那些关注减少参与者负担的研究设计,如经验抽样和多波纵向设计。鉴于人们对工作场所虐待行为结构的心理测量学特性持续存在担忧,作者基于三个独立的现场研究(N=2636)验证了一个四项目的经历不文明行为衡量标准。除了保留基于员工对不文明行为定义(即模糊的伤害意图)的概念一致性(即判断标准)的项目外,还根据外部标准选择了能够解释感兴趣的结果的增量方差的项目(例如,角色超载、人际偏差)。与其他虐待行为结构(即滥用监督、主管破坏)有较大系统关系的项目被排除在外。反过来,作者证明了四项目衡量标准是性别不变的,这是迄今为止文献中受到关注较少的一个关键问题。他们还通过实验研究了回忆窗口(2 周、1 个月、1 年)的影响,发现对各种感兴趣的结果的效应大小存在不同的模式。第四项独立的现场研究是在纵向框架内对该衡量标准的实际应用进行的。检验了经历不文明行为和反生产工作行为的自回归模型。数据来自 278 名受访者在 3 个时间点的样本中收集,每次评估之间间隔 1 个月。讨论了这些发现的意义。